RE: Males subs are the "bottom of the food chain"

RE: Males subs are the "bottom of the food chain" (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Mistress

Message

KindLadyGrey -> RE: Males subs are the "bottom of the food chain" (2/29/2008 6:35:31 PM)
Shakti Sama has invoked Godwin's Law.

AcademyForSlaves -> RE: Males subs are the "bottom of the food chain" (2/29/2008 6:59:15 PM)
I've never seen a male slave being "fawned" over by dominant Women but I agree about never seeing a male dom being fawned over by Women, not even by submissive Women (at least not the way vanilla Women throw themselves at and fight over a vanilla man who seems macho and hunky). Which is why those dom males were jealous of that male slave. men like attention just as much as Women do. Everyone wants to feel loved and admired. Perhaps all men can learn a lesson from this. Treat a Woman like a Goddess or Queen, and She will respect you in return. It works for Me and all the other Women I know. :)

darchChylde -> RE: Males subs are the "bottom of the food chain" (2/29/2008 7:18:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AcademyForSlaves Perhaps all men can learn a lesson from this. Treat a Woman like a Goddess or Queen, and She will respect you in return. It works for Me and all the other Women I know. :) Perhaps this works for you and your social circle. But, speaking as one of the lucky submissive men who's felt the occasional "fawning" by dominant women and vanilla women alike; this is absolutely the worst advice. In my experience, if a guy runs around treating women like goddesses and queens he'll find a lack of respect shown to him. This is akin to calling every dominant woman "Mistress" or every other woman "sweetheart" or "darling". It lessons the impact of doing so for that special someone and comes off as patronizing and sniveling, which i'll admit would take great skill to do both effecively at the same time. i've found that if a guy, in whatever walk of life, treated women like women (or even better, as people); he's more like to find women, no matter the what the sticker on their lapel says) to be much more responsive to him. Edited for words that seemed to disappear from my post by the time i hit "Ok"

undergroundsea -> RE: Males subs are the "bottom of the food chain" (2/29/2008 8:00:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: darchChylde quote: ORIGINAL: AcademyForSlaves Perhaps all men can learn a lesson from this. Treat a Woman like a Goddess or Queen, and She will respect you in return. It works for Me and all the other Women I know. :) Perhaps this works for you and your social circle. I agree. Attraction and attention flow every which way. Sure, there is something to be said about how respect might beget respect (more so, courtesy might beget courtesy). However I think this reciprocation occurs only if there is a broader foundation for earning respect. Thus, I think respect does not come simply from treating a woman like a goddess or queen; doing so unconditionally can lead to being taken for granted and not respected so much. One can earn unidimensional respect of others through a variety of means (I might respect a person for an ability to achieve results yet not think well of the person for his ethics or in general) but I think a broader sense of respect comes from admiration or appreciation, or a sense of social challenge. By social challenge I do not mean a situation that is adversarial or competitive, but a situation where one finds another socially interesting, or where one sees the other to be strong and true to self. Cheers, Sea

undergroundsea -> RE: Males subs are the "bottom of the food chain" (2/29/2008 8:07:37 PM)
I am active in several BDSM communities through online and in-person means. I enjoy good social terms with many persons of each orientation and role. My collective experience (sure there are exceptions) does not lead me to feel the BDSM community thinks of me at the bottom of the food chain due to my role preference. Even if one has qualms or holds negative stereotypes about my role, this role is one part of me and I think what I convey about myself comes more from the sum of me. Usually when I have faced a challenge, my observations and intuition say it had more to do with being a single guy in unfamiliar company, or with lack of commonality and for general reasons rather than due to my interest in submission. I allow that my experience may differ from that of others. I allow that there might be people who do not have a good impression of male subs and our paths simply have not crossed by coincidence or by design. I think one reason I have experienced as I have is because I am generally not worrying in BDSM circles that I will not be accepted because of my interest in Fm. I think this open attitude influences my interactions and the energy I send, the response I get, and how I interpret any cold response. Cheers, Sea

SixFootMaster -> RE: Males subs are the "bottom of the food chain" (2/29/2008 8:42:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ShaktiSama quote: ORIGINAL: SixFootMaster And yet they are designed, edited, and run mostly by women allegedly for the promotion of womankind. Oh yes. The promotion of womankind. Interesting fact: the majority of day-to-day discipline of Jews in concentration camps was handled by other Jews. The Nazis picked out some "special" Jews, both in the ghettos and the camps, to help them control and slowly liquidate the others--they were called "kapos". Kapos would receive all sorts of benefits in exchange for their cooperation in rounding up, terrorizing and murdering their fellow "untermenschen". The best of these benefits, of course, was that they got to be the victimizers rather than the victims. Many of them survived the Holocaust. The women who "design, edit and run" magazines like Cosmo are essentially kapos. They don't work for "womankind", they work for corporations and the patriarchal state. Specifically, their magazines are built around advertisements for the corporations who profit by creating the maximum number of female consumers of beauty and diet products. There are several multi-billion dollar industries which require a lot of female insecurity and unhappiness to maintain their profit margin. Cosmo exists to keep their profits high. As it so happens, women who cannot relate well to men and obsess 24/7 about their appearance make excellent consumers. They buy a LOT of crap and tear their bodies and their lives apart, trying to make themselves happy. And many of them are so desperate that they will believe almost anything. Including that some incredibly generic artificial "sex tip" is going to "drive their man wild". Or that the thing that keeps them from having a loving man in their lives is the lack of the matching accessories and a skinny enough ass. [:'(] Regardless, a "women's" magazine like Cosmo will never benefit if they help women form happy, long-lasting, mutually loving relationships with their own bodies OR with men. Nor will they ever bother the pretty little head of a "smart, modern woman" with silly issues like their country being at war, or the degradation of their environment, the loss of their legal rights, or the need to exercise their right to vote. All they have to do is keep women chasing their tails forever with bad romantic and sexual advice and hammer them with constant belittling of their appearance, and they're in the money. Ja mein herr. Seig heil. By the same token, I think viewing "men's magazines" that teach men to hate, objectify and mistreat women as "light entertainment" is foolish. A "men's magazine" is no more "light entertainment" than a woman's magazine is. These magazines exist to teach men that women are either sexual objects or the enemy, to be despised and hunted down like animals. As it so happens? Unhappy men make fine consumers too. There are many multi-billion industries which profit from the unfulfilled emotional needs and misery of men. And so it goes. [;)] P.S. On-topic? Submissive men are incredibly hot and desirable. I can't wait to have one of my own! [:)] I completely agree, which brings us full circle - and back to my original point which is that the problem is endemic to both genders, and not the exclusive or near exclusive province of just one. Six.

ShaktiSama -> RE: Males subs are the "bottom of the food chain" (2/29/2008 11:11:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KindLadyGrey Shakti Sama has invoked Godwin's Law. I have about as much respect for that law as Al Capone had for Prohibition. [;)]

LadyHugs -> RE: Males subs are the "bottom of the food chain" (3/1/2008 11:10:36 AM)
Dear KindLadyGrey, Ladies and Gentlemen; The 'male subs are the bottom of the food chain' mentality has been around an awful lot and for a very long time. To me, the real guts, strength and power--comes from men who are submissive/slave/servants to a Female Dominant. They can always recall their power and withdraw their submission. It has been spoken by ultra feminists and insecure dominant men, from what I've personally heard. The selling of BDSM romance novels puts that kind of 'bottom of the food chain' mentality and or attitude; so men entering the scene really--believe that this is how it is supposed to be. IF, and I repeat IF--a man was such a helpless worm and useless--I wouldn't want one, as it would be much like a child and or dependent. Power is, being a woman with authority and being able to command a Corps, Brigade, Regiment, Company and or one soldier by uttering words. Power comes with responsibilities and faith others have in the one holding power--to use it wisely. Semper Fidelis -- Semper Respicio. Just some thoughts. Respectfully submitted for consideration, Lady Hugs

servantnj -> RE: Males subs are the "bottom of the food chain" (3/1/2008 5:27:45 PM)
quote: "This very attitude is also why many submissive men feel ashamed to be submissive and why many Dominant men think of submissive men as 'the bottom of the food chain'." I usually really care about what dominant men think in general. Seems to me they are way too buzy thinking, instead of paying attention to their personal appearance. Seriously boys, get some fashion sense. Zorro is not sexy.

sjskuared -> RE: Males subs are the "bottom of the food chain" (3/1/2008 5:37:14 PM)
I really don't think it is helpful to use the nazi analogy either. And no the majority of control of prisoners in the camps was not from other Jews however that may have been the case in some places. To the OP, if male subs are at the bottom then what does that make FemDoms? Are they on the second level of the food chain. The fallacy of MaleDoms who despise MaleSubs is that they think a man who is submissive to women will also be submissive to other men.

TermsConditions -> RE: Males subs are the "bottom of the food chain" (3/1/2008 5:45:00 PM)
The Great Chain of Being is so written: Beginning with Masters at the top. Then Mistresses. Then Subs, and Male Subs. And at the bottom, Switches. It's in Black and White.

RedMagic1 -> RE: Males subs are the "bottom of the food chain" (3/1/2008 5:51:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: darchChylde i've found that if a guy, in whatever walk of life, treated women like women (or even better, as people); he's more like to find women, no matter the what the sticker on their lapel says) to be much more responsive to him. I have also found this to be true. I think that men not understanding this is the #1 reason they have a hard time getting relationship-oriented dates with kinky women -- whether Domme or sub. It's just not attractive to sexually objectify someone who is three-dimensional.

sub4mistressinnj -> RE: Males subs are the "bottom of the food chain" (3/1/2008 8:49:59 PM)
....

atursvcMaam -> RE: Males subs are the "bottom of the food chain" (3/1/2008 10:46:31 PM)
SSSHHHH, don't tell anyone, but .....the ones who try to roar "Call me Sir" the loudest are the ones who are most insecure, and the easiest to take down. i tend to be far more impressed with a Dominant who does not need to prove anything.

SixFootMaster -> RE: Males subs are the "bottom of the food chain" (3/2/2008 3:23:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sjskuared I really don't think it is helpful to use the nazi analogy either. And no the majority of control of prisoners in the camps was not from other Jews however that may have been the case in some places. To the OP, if male subs are at the bottom then what does that make FemDoms? Are they on the second level of the food chain. The fallacy of MaleDoms who despise MaleSubs is that they think a man who is submissive to women will also be submissive to other men. From a male Dominant's perspective: Unless gay or bi-sexual, we don't really care about male subs at all. They are a periphery to us and completely outside anything we are interested in. The suggestion the male dominant sees male subs as the bottom of the food chain is erroneous for that reason. If anyone thinks male submissives are the bottom of the food chain, it is that section of male submissives that WANT to feel like the bottom of the food chain. Really, this whole conversation is more or less a self perpetuating myth. Six. Edited for spelling and grammar.

darchChylde -> RE: Males subs are the "bottom of the food chain" (3/2/2008 3:37:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SixFootMaster From a male Dominant's perspective: Unless gay or bi-sexual, we don't really care about male subs at all. They are a periphery to us and completely outside anything we are interested in. The suggestion the male dominant sees male subs as the bottom of the food chain is erroneous for that reason. If anyone thinks male submissives are the bottom of the food chain, it is that section of male submissives that WANT to feel like the bottom of the food chain. Really, this whole conversation is more or less a self perpetuating myth. Six. Edited for spelling and grammar. Thank you for giving us the entire spectrum of opinions from all male dominants, that must be so much easier than speaking only for yourself. Now if you'll follow me, the door to the real world is here on my left. Ok, snarkiness aside. i know a number of straight male dominants who don't find dominance or submission gender specific, and truly admire the beauty of submission in all it's forms without having to equate it to the desire to fuck the submissive. On this same point, when i need someone to talk to about my role and growth in Ds and in my family, i go to Ma'ams Husband who happens to be dominant without being bi or gay. On the other hand, there really are male dominants whose sexuality is not the consideration when they decide to blatantly disrespect male submissives. i've been there, i've experienced it. Your denying it does not affect the truth.

SixFootMaster -> RE: Males subs are the "bottom of the food chain" (3/2/2008 4:02:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: darchChylde quote: ORIGINAL: SixFootMaster From a male Dominant's perspective: Unless gay or bi-sexual, we don't really care about male subs at all. They are a periphery to us and completely outside anything we are interested in. The suggestion the male dominant sees male subs as the bottom of the food chain is erroneous for that reason. If anyone thinks male submissives are the bottom of the food chain, it is that section of male submissives that WANT to feel like the bottom of the food chain. Really, this whole conversation is more or less a self perpetuating myth. Six. Edited for spelling and grammar. Thank you for giving us the entire spectrum of opinions from all male dominants, that must be so much easier than speaking only for yourself. Now if you'll follow me, the door to the real world is here on my left. Ok, snarkiness aside. i know a number of straight male dominants who don't find dominance or submission gender specific, and truly admire the beauty of submission in all it's forms without having to equate it to the desire to fuck the submissive. On this same point, when i need someone to talk to about my role and growth in Ds and in my family, i go to Ma'ams Husband who happens to be dominant without being bi or gay. On the other hand, there really are male dominants whose sexuality is not the consideration when they decide to blatantly disrespect male submissives. i've been there, i've experienced it. Your denying it does not affect the truth. Sush boy and read. "From a male Dominant's perspective:" See that "a" right there? The one you quoted? Yes, that one. It means "This is from MY perspective as a male dominant". You've seen it, I haven't. Perhaps you live in a shittier part of the world then. In my experience, male dominants take one of two attitudes - the one I quoted above, or an open appreciation of the male submissive. I've never witnessed this whole "all male subs are the bottom of the food chain" attitude, I have however witnessed male submissives who want to feel worthless and less than scum, and thrive on being treated like that. Not my cup of tea, but each to their own. Six. Edited to add: Perhaps the clubs also in general have better management over here, since I'm fairly sure that exhibiting that attitude would be grounds for a "don't let the door handle hit you on the way out".

Lockit -> RE: Males subs are the "bottom of the food chain" (3/2/2008 4:17:01 PM)
Thinks sixfoot just proved that he doesn't hold with the better treatment in the clubs... because from how he spoke to darchChyle seemed to prove darchChyle's point and seemed as if he held himself above darchChyld. Interesting...

darchChylde -> RE: Males subs are the "bottom of the food chain" (3/2/2008 4:19:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SixFootMaster Sush boy and read. "From a male Dominant's perspective:" See that "a" right there? The one you quoted? Yes, that one. It means "This is from MY perspective as a male dominant". You've seen it, I haven't. Perhaps you live in a shittier part of the world then. In my experience, male dominants take one of two attitudes - the one I quoted above, or an open appreciation of the male submissive. I've never witnessed this whole "all male subs are the bottom of the food chain" attitude, I have however witnessed male submissives who want to feel worthless and less than scum, and thrive on being treated like that. Not my cup of tea, but each to their own. Six, First: the word is "shush" not sush. Second: you have in no way earned the right to call me "boy". it is a derogative term from any but those who have the right to use it, and with love. Using such a term in such a manner does not do much for your argument, since it shows a gross level of disrespect. Now i understand that my post was not entirely respectful, but i did so admitting a snarky attitude (which according to Mirriam-Webster is "sarcastic, impertinent, or irreverent in tone or manner") and did not act in such a blatantly hostile manner. Third: Why yes, i read "a male Dominant's perspective". I also read "Unless gay or bi-sexual, we don't really care about male subs at all" and "They are a periphery to us and completely outside anything we are interested in." Finally: As far as where i live, i've seen this in both the southeast and southwest united states. But i have seen and heard such comments from Austrailians such as yourself. Now you may have only either spent time amongst such upstanding members of the community as yourself, or perhaps you are selectively ignorant. i won't venture an opinion on which based on such limited information as i have on you. Edited to add: quote: ORIGINAL: Lockit Thinks sixfoot just proved that he doesn't hold with the better treatment in the clubs... because from how he spoke to darchChyle seemed to prove darchChyle's point and seemed as if he held himself above darchChyld. Interesting... Hehe, so i'm not the only one to get that feeling? LoL

LadyHibiscus -> RE: Males subs are the "bottom of the food chain" (3/2/2008 4:24:37 PM)
::::::::::just wishing some folks would stick to their own ponds..........:::::::::::

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625